News
SpaceX’s orbital Starship launch debut may be pushed to 2022 by slow FAA reviews
In a rare sign of material progress, SpaceX and the FAA have finally released what is known as a draft environmental assessment (EA) of the company’s South Texas Starship launch plans.
Set to be the largest and most powerful rocket in spaceflight history when it first begins orbital launches, the process of acquiring permission to launch Starship and its Super Heavy booster out of the wetlands of the South Texas coast was never going to be easy. The Boca Chica site SpaceX ultimately settled on for its first private launch facilities – initially meant for Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy but later dedicated to BFR (now Starship) – is simultaneously surrounded by sensitive coastal habitats populated by several threatened or endangered species and situated mere miles as the crow flies from a city whose temporary population oscillates from a few thousand to tens of thousands.
Reception and analysis of the draft and its timing have been mixed. On one hand, SpaceX’s draft EA – completed with oversight from the FAA and help from the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) – gives a number of reasons for optimism. In a sign that SpaceX is taking a pragmatic approach to the inevitable environmental review and launch license approval hurdles standing in front of orbital South Texas Starship launches, the company has actually pursued what is known as a “programmatic environmental assessment” (PEA).
Most importantly, that means that SpaceX’s Starbase PEA – if approved – will be more like a foundation or stepping stone that should make it easier to start small and methodically expand the scope and nature of the company’s plans for Boca Chica. Along those lines, as part of Starbase’s first dedicated environmental assessment, SpaceX has proposed a maximum of 23 flight operations annually while Starship is still in the development phase, including up to 20 suborbital Starship test flights and 3 orbital launches (or Super Heavy hops). Once SpaceX has worked out enough kinks for slightly more confident Starship operations, the company would enter an “operational phase” that would allow for as many as five suborbital Starship launches and five orbital Starship launches, as well as ship and booster landings back on land after all 10 possible launches.
In other words, SpaceX’s initial draft PEA is extremely conservative, requesting permission for what amounts to a bare minimum concept of operations for orbital Starship launches. At a maximum of 3-5 orbital launches per year, a PEA and subsequent launch license approved as-is would likely give SpaceX just enough slack to perform basic Earth orbit launches and no more than one or two orbital refilling tests per year. However, as an example, a five-launch maximum would almost entirely prevent SpaceX from launching Starship to Mars, the Moon, and maybe even high-energy Earth orbits without using all of its annual launch allotments on a single mission.
Perhaps most importantly, the draft PEA as proposed would unequivocally prevent SpaceX from performing the NASA Human Lander System (HLS) Moon landings it received an almost $3 billion contract to complete. Each HLS Starship Moon landing is expected to require anywhere from 10-16 launches to deliver a depot ship, HLS lander, and ~1200 tons of propellant to orbit. However, in terms of SpaceX’s prospects of developing Starship as quickly as possible, that’s actually a good thing. Above all else, SpaceX’s slimmed-down draft PEA should be far easier for the FAA to approve than a PEA pursuing permission for Starship’s ultimate ambitions – dozens to hundreds of launches annually – from the beginning. In theory, with this barebones PEA approved, SpaceX would then be able to build off the foundation with additional environmental assessments – like, for example, of expanding Starship’s maximum launch cadence.
Of course, SpaceX first needs the FAA turn this first draft PEA into a favorable environmental assessment (not a guarantee) before any of the above starts to matter. Based on the content of the draft itself and associated appendixes, SpaceX appears to have a decent shot at receiving a “finding of no significant impact (FONSI)” or “mitigated FONSI” determination. However, SpaceX began the process of creating that draft as far back as mid-2020, followed by an FAA announcement in November 2020. The implication is that the FAA managed to drag out a draft release process that some have estimated should have taken 3-4 months into an arduous 10-15 month ordeal.
Combined with the uphill battle it’s starting to look like SpaceX will have to wage for an orbital Starship launch license in South Texas, it’s looking increasingly likely that Starship, Super Heavy, and Starbase will be technically ready for orbital launch tests well before the FAA is ready to approve or license them. Barring delays, the public now has until mid-October to read and comment on SpaceX’s draft PEA, after which the FAA and SpaceX will review those comments and hopefully turn the draft into a completed review. Even if the FAA were to somehow take just two months to return a best-case FONSI, clearing Starbase of environmental launch hurdles, it’s hard to imagine that the agency could then turn around and approve an orbital Starship launch license – or even a one-off experimental permit – in the last few weeks of 2021.
Ultimately, that means that nothing short of a minor miracle is likely to prevent the FAA’s environmental review and licensing delays from directly delaying Starship’s orbital launch debut. There is at least a chance that Starship, Super Heavy, and Starbase’s orbital launch site wont be ready for orbital launches by the end of the year, but it’s increasingly difficult to imagine that all three won’t be proof tested, qualified, and ready for action just a month or two from now. For the time being, we’ll just have to wait and see where the cards fall.
News
Tesla (TSLA) receives “Buy” rating and $551 PT from Canaccord Genuity
He also maintained a “Buy” rating for TSLA stock over the company’s improving long-term outlook, which is driven by autonomy and robotics.
Canaccord Genuity analyst George Gianarikas raised his Tesla (NASDAQ:TSLA) price target from $482 to $551. He also maintained a “Buy” rating for TSLA stock over the company’s improving long-term outlook, which is driven by autonomy and robotics.
The analyst’s updated note
Gianarikas lowered his 4Q25 delivery estimates but pointed to several positive factors in the Tesla story. He noted that EV adoption in emerging markets is gaining pace, and progress in FSD and the Robotaxi rollout in 2026 represent major upside drivers. Further progress in the Optimus program next year could also add more momentum for the electric vehicle maker.
“Overall, yes, 4Q25 delivery expectations are being revised lower. However, the reset in the US EV market is laying the groundwork for a more durable and attractive long-term demand environment.
“At the same time, EV penetration in emerging markets is accelerating, reinforcing Tesla’s potential multi‑year growth runway beyond the US. Global progress in FSD and the anticipated rollout of a larger robotaxi fleet in 2026 are increasingly important components of the Tesla equity story and could provide sentiment tailwinds,” the analyst wrote.
Tesla’s busy 2026
The upcoming year would be a busy one for Tesla, considering the company’s plans and targets. The autonomous two-seat Cybercab has been confirmed to start production sometime in Q2 2026, as per Elon Musk during the 2025 Annual Shareholder Meeting.
Apart from this, Tesla is also expected to unveil the next-generation Roadster on April 1, 2026. Tesla is also expected to start high-volume production of the Tesla Semi in Nevada next year.
Apart from vehicle launches, Tesla has expressed its intentions to significantly ramp the rollout of FSD to several regions worldwide, such as Europe. Plans are also underway to launch more Robotaxi networks in several more key areas across the United States.
News
Waymo sues Santa Monica over order to halt overnight charging sessions
In its complaint, Waymo argued that its self-driving cars’ operations do not constitute a public nuisance, and compliance with the city’s order would cause the company irreparable harm.
Waymo has filed a lawsuit against the City of Santa Monica in Los Angeles County Superior Court, seeking to block an order that requires the company to cease overnight charging at two facilities.
In its complaint, Waymo argued that its self-driving cars’ operations do not constitute a public nuisance, and compliance with the city’s order would cause the company irreparable harm.
Nuisance claims
As noted in a report from the Los Angeles Times, Waymo’s two charging sites at Euclid Street and Broadway have operated for about a year, supporting the company’s growing fleet with round-the-clock activity. Unfortunately, this has also resulted in residents in the area reportedly being unable to sleep due to incessant beeping from self-driving taxis that are moving in and out of the charging stations around the clock.
Frustrated residents have protested against the Waymos by blocking the vehicles’ paths, placing cones, and “stacking” cars to create backups. This has also resulted in multiple calls to the police.
Last month, the city issued an order to Waymo and its charging partner, Voltera, to cease overnight operations at the charging locations, stating that the self-driving vehicles’ activities at night were a public nuisance. A December 15 meeting yielded no agreement on mitigations like software rerouting. Waymo proposed changes, but the city reportedly insisted that nothing would satisfy the irate residents.
“We are disappointed that the City has chosen an adversarial path over a collaborative one. The City’s position has been to insist that no actions taken or proposed by Waymo would satisfy the complaining neighbors and therefore must be deemed insufficient,” a Waymo spokesperson stated.
Waymo pushes back
In its legal complaint, Waymo stated that its “activities at the Broadway Facilities do not constitute a public nuisance.” The company also noted that it “faces imminent and irreparable harm to its operations, employees, and customers” from the city’s order. The suit also stated that the city was fully aware that the Voltera charging sites would be operating around the clock to support Waymo’s self-driving taxis.
The company highlighted over one million trips in Santa Monica since launch, with more than 50,000 rides starting or ending there in November alone. Waymo also criticized the city for adopting a contentious strategy against businesses.
“The City of Santa Monica’s recent actions are inconsistent with its stated goal of attracting investment. At a time when the City faces a serious fiscal crisis, officials are choosing to obstruct properly permitted investment rather than fostering a ‘ready for business’ environment,” Waymo stated.
News
Tesla FSD v14.2.2 is getting rave reviews from drivers
So far, early testers have reported buttery-smooth drives with confident performance, even at night or on twisty roads.
Tesla Full Self-Driving (Supervised) v14.2.2 is receiving positive reviews from owners, with several drivers praising the build’s lack of hesitation during lane changes and its smoother decision-making, among others.
The update, which started rolling out on Monday, also adds features like dynamic arrival pin adjustment. So far, early testers have reported buttery-smooth drives with confident performance, even at night or on twisty roads.
Owners highlight major improvements
Longtime Tesla owner and FSD user @BLKMDL3 shared a detailed 10-hour impression of FSD v14.2.2, noting that the system exhibited “zero lane change hesitation” and “extremely refined” lane choices. He praised Mad Max mode’s performance, stellar parking in locations including ticket dispensers, and impressive canyon runs even in dark conditions.
Fellow FSD user Dan Burkland reported an hour of FSD v14.2.2’s nighttime driving with “zero hesitations” and “buttery smooth” confidence reminiscent of Robotaxi rides in areas such as Austin, Texas. Veteran FSD user Whole Mars Catalog also demonstrated voice navigation via Grok, while Tesla owner Devin Olsen completed a nearly two-hour drive with FSD v14.2.2 in heavy traffic and rain with strong performance.
Closer to unsupervised
FSD has been receiving rave reviews, even from Tesla’s competitors. Xpeng CEO He Xiaopeng, for one, offered fresh praise for FSD v14.2 after visiting Silicon Valley. Following extended test drives of Tesla vehicles running the latest FSD software, He stated that the system has made major strides, reinforcing his view that Tesla’s approach to autonomy is indeed the proper path towards autonomy.
According to He, Tesla’s FSD has evolved from a smooth Level 2 advanced driver assistance system into what he described as a “near-Level 4” experience in terms of capabilities. While acknowledging that areas of improvement are still present, the Xpeng CEO stated that FSD’s current iteration significantly surpasses last year’s capabilities. He also reiterated his belief that Tesla’s strategy of using the same autonomous software and hardware architecture across private vehicles and robotaxis is the right long-term approach, as it would allow users to bypass intermediate autonomy stages and move closer to Level 4 functionality.
Tesla (TSLA) receives “Buy” rating and $551 PT from Canaccord Genuity
Waymo sues Santa Monica over order to halt overnight charging sessions
